Featured No love in Acts

αστείος is not the normal word for love. Most translators do not think it should be translated that way, even though one so great as Wycliffe translated it that way. Apparently most take αστείος τω θεώ as a phrase that does not especially even emphasize "God." Just noticing quite a few Bibles don't even translate θεώ, including (what is supposed to be) the extremely wood ASV, as well as extremely popular NIV.

The whole phrase is "dearly loved," but yes, you have dug up another. Looks like the CSB (which replaces HCSB and has the same) may be the only major translation among those most folks are using that sort of squeaks the word in.

One thing I like about the Baptist Board is that there is enough scholarship and determination that you can throw out a challenge like this and someone is going to take it up. I appreciate that y'all have done so. The fact that you really have to work at it makes me feel more confident about something I was initially tentative about -- that Acts does not use or stress love, particularly in the use of the word agape, in the way much of the rest of the New Testament does. It stresses love in action. We might sort of say, like James, What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath love, and have not works?...shew me thy love without thy works, and I will shew thee my love by my works.

Matthew 5:44 But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, Acts 7:60 And he kneeled down, and cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.
John 13:35 By this shall all men know that ye are my disciples, if ye have love one to another. Acts 11:29 Then the disciples, every man according to his ability, determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt in Judæa:
John 14:15 If ye love me, keep my commandments. Acts 5:28-29 saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name?...Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.
John 15:13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Acts 20:24 ...neither count I my life dear unto myself...
John 21:16 He saith to him again the second time, Simon, son of Jonas, lovest thou me? He saith unto him, Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I love thee. He saith unto him, Feed my sheep. Acts 10:34 Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons... Acts 20:28 Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God...

 

I have thought that also. The type of treatise affects the type of writing. Of course, the gospels are also history, but it seems that they are something of a different nature than Acts as an historical narrative.

 

Not if you comprehend what I am saying, and don't take it out of context.

"Sigh" and "Oh brother." Really substantial. Are you kin to RevMitchell? He does that a lot.

The point is you are really working the edges to find anything to contract the premise.

 

is part of the context I was referring to that you left out in #33. I never claimed to have thoroughly checked every possible source. Nevertheless, I think all the verses offered to the contrary are a stretch concerning the point of the difference in the uses of the words (love - agapao and once phileo) in Luke's Gospel, compared to the book of Acts. However, if you are satisfied that these verses prove the initial person's statement wrong, then I am satisfied that you are satisfied. That hasn't changed how I am considering it.